With only 99 days left on the stump to have their voices heard, our incumbent President and the presumed GOP nominee have gone eerily silent on anything gun related. Connie Cass of the AP writes that the candidates have evolved towards gun rights. Can this be true? Have both candidates suddenly seen the light? She then goes on to pretty much tear the President and GOP candidate new ones on how they started their carriers and made comments regarding increased gun control, but low and behold nothing is getting done. Even after the horrific event in Aurora. Her entire hoplophobic argument is trying to understand why aren’t they doing something? . . .
Questions abound regarding the NRA and GOA’s influence on the hill and in the oval office. Do our gun advocates have an unbreakable stranglehold on our government? It doesn’t seem so given the heated rhetoric and ridiculous legislation being thrown against the wall even in the run-up to the election.
Those who are running to keep their jobs will want to stay as far away as possible from this whole thing until calmer heads can prevail. Knee-jerk reactions to anything usually aren’t successful or helpful in the long run. In fact most of the protesting from politicians falling over each other to get in front of the cameras is probably intended more for getting face time and scrounging up votes than actually passing legislation.
Cass points out that Mitt Romney isn’t exactly a golden boy in regard to gun rights either. Most of us looking at this upcoming election probably aren’t one-issue voters. Given her descriptions of the candidates, there’s good and bad on both sides as far as 2A is concerned. She points out that Romney became a life member of the NRA just prior to launching his election bid. Even as a matter of convenience that carries some weight despite some of his past voting history. You wouldn’t want one of the NRA’s most famous members voting against your wishes now would you?
At minimum it gives the NRA an ear. Probably. Obama on the other hand has some serious ground to make up. John Lott has quoted Obama as saying, “I don’t believe people should be able to own guns”. That was the beginning, middle and end of the conversation as far as our president is concerned. According to Lott, Obama has since refused to have any meaningful discussion regarding gun control. Obama’s silence at this point is more meant to try and placate anyone who might think of voting for him but actually owns a firearm.
Are we winning the battle over gun rights in America? I’d like to think we are. It’s a long road ahead for both advocates and opponents alike. We may never completely settle the the issue of our second amendment rights, either for or against.
Historically we are a country which hasn’t been invaded by a foreign army. Central American gangs may a different matter, but the point is that people who don’t have any recollection of ever needing to defend themselves or their country from tyranny or foreign invasion tend to begin to believe it isn’t really important. They can develop utopian values. It can be very easy to fall into this trap.
Citizens tend to rely now more than ever on government, from settling disputes to raising their children. Protection is another area where many have simply closed their eyes and put their blind faith in government. The people of Aurora, Virginia Tech and others received shocking wake up calls that they need to take responsibility for their own protection.
We in our communities across the nation need to begin to take responsibility for our safety and sovereignty. Whether it’s the local chapter of the Zetas or defending your family from a home invader, it’s our right and duty to provide that protection and safety. And hey, if the zombie apocalypse ever does really happen, you’ll be the most popular person on the block.
Gary Johnson 2012!!!
I’ll say this, BlinkyPete: I give you points for tenacity.
Hell Yeah Gary Johnson 2012. Are you from NM BlinkyPete?
Mass/soon to be NH
Gary Johnson is great — he’s like Ron Paul on the issues, but with more executive experience than Obama and Romney combined.
He signed New Mexico’s first concealed carry law… and vetoed almost everything else on his desk (Legend has it he vetoed more bills than all other Governors combined.)
He’s not a gun owner, although it sounds like he’s rethinking that:
http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/23/gary-johnson-says-armed-audience-member-could-have-ended-batman-massacre/
And I am sure Gary whoever he is Johnson will be elected president by a wide margin.
or maybe just enough votes will be sifted away to give us Big O for 4 more years
I live in Arkansas. There’s no chance of Obama winning here.
If Romney wins my state (Massachusetts), he’ll be winning in a landslide anyway. Unless you live in a swing state, why choose between “the lesser of two evils”?
Ok, well then all you need to do is pick what color you’d like the exact same president to be for the next 4 years.
“And hey, if the zombie apocalypse ever does really happen, you’ll be the most popular person on the block.”
Or, you know, a riot or something. Or really anything much more likely to happen than a zombie apocalypse.
True that!
even a natural disaster for that matter.
“Questions abound regarding the NRA and GOA’s influence on the hill and in the oval office”
Considering there are thousands of gun control laws on the books the NRA and GOA are obviously not all powerful or anywhere near it. My concern is with the influence of the radical feminists on the hill and in the oval office. The radfems are the most authoritarian political movement in American history and the most modern bigoted one.
as i and many more ttag’ers have pointed out, who do you want appointing the next sc justices.
Personally Ted Cruz, but that probably isn’t going to happen. Although if he goes to Washington which I think he will he will have a say in the appointment process.
+1. I was pretty excited when he won the runoff last night. Things are looking up for the Lone Star state.
Sorry Blinky, we gotta vote for Romney or Obama, otherwise we could get another four more years!
Err, that would be “back-pedaling…”
Why should Obama get his skirts dirty? Barry doesn’t need to talk about gun control because he has Lautenberg, McCarthy, Feinstein and the rest of that scumbag crew to do his dirty work for him. When he’s a re-elected lame duck, things will change, and issues that he’s back-burnered to get re-elected will take their rightful place in his plan to remake America.
He can’t give up on gun control. It’s a critical part of Democratic Party orthodoxy, just like you “you didn’t build this, you ignorant peasant.”
I totally agree. I’m not specifically out here to make this a partisan issue, but the Democrats are much worse with gun control than the Republicans. Look at Chicago, NY, LA. Then look at Texas and WI. See a pattern? I’m voting for the NRA member.
It gets more complicated when you add Washington and Oregon to the mix.
But yes, Democrats generally do suck golf balls through garden hoses on gun rights. To say anything else would be just denying plain reality.
What blows is I pretty much disagree with the Republicans on every other issue, so politics is a giant damned if you do, damned if you don’t exercise.
Would everyone be happy if Obama became a lifetime member of the NRA, like Romney? In 4 years Obama hasn’t tried to do anything to gun rights but Romney has passed anti-gun laws. I’m actually more worried about Romney than Obama for gun rights.
bruce, do the names schumer, lautenberg, pelosi mean anything to you? barry will be getting input from them on his choices once he’s re-elected. not real happy with romney but his party is friendlier to us than the dems.
Look at what Obama has said and done during 4 years when he’s had a re-election to worry about…just imagine what he’ll do when he has de facto immunity. Think the unfathomable breaches of law and Constitution with Obamacare, applied to the 2A.
Not a bad point, Bruce. Romney gets a slight edge just because his court appointments would hopefully be more friendly to protecting individual rights. Hardly a certainty, though.
In 4 years Obama hasn’t tried to do anything to gun rights…
That kinda depends on what you think the point of Fast&Furious was, doesn’t it?
….but Romney has passed anti-gun laws.
Not in the last 4 years he hasn’t.
Nah, he just approved a permanent assault weapon ban while governor of Mass. No sunset date; no scheduled review. Permanent until repealed, and good luck with that sh!t in Massachusetts.
Wrong answer RPOC. There is plenty of evidence on Obama’s Anti Gun Position.
http://freepdfhosting.com/446ba53966.pdf
Also, At the absolute very least, with Romney, we have leverage. Just Like Obama in his first 4 years Romney will want another 4 years. And therefore we have leverage over him as a first term President. No so with Lame Duck Immune Obama in a second term.
Everyone keeps talking about Romney’s previous ban on assault weapons, but Romney has made it clear he sees this as a state issue. Same thing with healthcare.
Frankly, there is a reason I live in Texas. If California wants to pass draconian gun control measures, fine. Just so long as politicians from California don’t tell me how I should live.
Does anyone really think, especially in light of the ATF scandals, that Obama is going to continue to be so gun friendly when he isn’t facing re-election? Granted, there are other issues I’m worried about as well and Romney is much better than Obama on most of the ones I care about. However, even with Romney’s past track record I still have more faith in him then Obama.
Besides, past results is not always an indicator of future performance. Romney is not as tin-eared as Obama. I think he’ll be more Clinton-esque and will care about polls to the point where it might even be unhealthy.
Botswana: Frankly, there is a reason I live in Texas. If California wants to pass draconian gun control measures, fine. Just so long as politicians from California don’t tell me how I should live.
But that’s exactly the point! You’re not insulated in Texas. Look at what’s in the news right now. Lautenberg from NJ and Feinstein from CA trying to pass a law that affects all of us, not just their own constituents.
You can’t always just sit back and say, “I got mine, screw you guys.”
Texas gun laws are all hat and no cattle. No open carry, no carry in a bar, signs with the force of law. Bah.
I’ll take TX gun laws over CA any day.
In Ohio we have open carry, bar carry, can buy any NFA items, etc. Our only negatives are signs have force of law, duty to inform, no guns in gun free zone parking lots, and a bad definition of loaded gun that makes having loaded magazines in your range bag illegal.
However, we have bills in progress to fix the magazine law, allow guns in parking lots, and remove the duty to inform.
@Accur81: Half a loaf better than none, I suppose.
Still, I’d rather have at least 90% of the loaf, if not the full thing. 🙂
And for all their bluster, Texans are quite willing to compromise their freedoms without much in the way of complaining, eh?
…and I’d take Massachusetts or Rhode Island over California, too. But I don’t see pro-gun folk singing their praises, either….
Make the pedal faster. Start asking which gun laws they favor repealing. Ask them what they will do about F+F. Ask them if they will allow gun parts like Barrels from overseas. Ask them if they will allow those Korean carbines in.
Ask and keep asking.
“Historically we are a country which hasn’t been invaded by a foreign army.”
How soon we forget the War of 1812!
Or, for that matter, Pancho Villa in 1916….
Or MS13 today
“The people of Aurora, Virginia Tech and others received shocking wake up calls that they need to take responsibility for their own protection.”
Well, both were “gun-free zones,” but assuming they were unarmed by choice, I think that’s just one of the calculated risks we take in life. Most Americans are very unlikely to encounter violence in their daily activities — it’s not irrational to decide that the security provided by CCW just isn’t worth the hassle.
That responsibility doesn’t solely take the form of arming up. The slaughter could have been stopped in the first few seconds if the closest half dozen people to the nutjob had rushed him en masse and tackled him. “Assault weapons”, body armor, hundred round drums, all that is irrelevant if he’s pinned under 1,200 pounds of moviegoer.
People keep asking “who will keep us safe”, which just another indication of the underlying problem. That passive attitude has to go. There are more of us than there are of these nutjobs, and when they decide to flip out we shouldn’t just sit back and take it. If you carry, then great. If not, then Zerg rush it is.
Oooops. You mean gun owners can vote????
Obama will get reelected this November. He will then proceed at some future point during his second term to shove gun prohibition down our collective throats . Guaran-damn-teed.
I have no faith in either of them on just about anything other than their own desire to be in power. Of that, I am certain.
+100.
Unfortunately, the Constitutional Party, or any other party (including the commie party), have about a snowballs chance of getting elected. Donkeys and Elephants dominate in the vast majority of elections.
Reminds me of the lyrics to that song they use for the original CSI TV program: “Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.” (The Who – Won’t get fooled again.”
Reading the referenced article, Romney seems completely and hopelessly rudderless. I suppose he’s been in politics longer than Obama (more time to change his opinion), but I don’t trust either of them.
Comments are closed.